- From: Dave Reynolds <der@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
- Date: Mon, 13 Jul 2009 09:16:58 +0100
- To: Steve Harris <steve.harris@garlik.com>
- CC: public-lod@w3.org
Steve Harris wrote: > On 10 Jul 2009, at 11:00, Toby Inkster wrote: > >> On Fri, 2009-07-10 at 10:40 +0100, Steve Harris wrote: >>> Personally I think that RDF/XML doesn't help, it's too hard to write >>> by hand. >> >> MicroTurtle, the sloppy RDF format: >> >> <http://buzzword.org.uk/2009/microturtle/spec> > > That's very interesting. I like it, but I'm not sure that it's > necessarily what I would ideally like if I were coming to RDF afresh. It > looks like the perl of RDF syntaxes :) Which is good for some people, > but not others. > > Something like NTriples + UTF-8 + @prefix could be an answer for people > new to RDF. One of the problems is the various triple shortcut syntaxes > we use. Either the stacked syntax of RDF/XML, or the punctuation of Turtle. > > For anyone who's about to say that Turtle = ntriples + UTF-8 + @prefix - > it doesn't help. The vast Majority of examples you see online use at > least ; and probably [] and , too, which makes it very hard to follow. > At least in my experience of introducing developers to RDF. FWIW my experience with technically savvy but non-semweb people is that Turtle is a not only a low barrier it is a selling feature in a way that abbreviated n-triples isn't. I've people who are using RDF solely because they find Turtle a more convenient, compact notation for writing down their data than any of the (mostly XML based) alternatives they've tried. The fact that you can use a similar notation in queries has helped too. Dave -- Hewlett-Packard Limited Registered Office: Cain Road, Bracknell, Berks RG12 1HN Registered No: 690597 England
Received on Monday, 13 July 2009 08:17:55 UTC